I'm getting annoyed at the "hunting is evil" brigade...

[Odin2005]

...That's come out because "Mrs Beauty Queen" Palin hunts caribou.

I'm an avid hunter and I'm no "murderous sociopath." Us hunters and anglers are, as a group, some of the biggest enviromentalists out there.

[PDJane]

1. The hunting isn't my problem with the woman.

Approving of shooting bears and wolves from helicopters is.

You want to get down at ground level, track and hunt for food, fine.

You want to kill a trophy for the hell of it, let the polar bears drown and shoot predators from the air, I've got problems with that.

[mcctatas]

3. Not only that....

why waste the fuel to hunt them from the sky? Suddenly Cheney's canned quail hunts don't seem so bad;)

[Odin2005]

9. Us real hunters hate those fuckers who shoot animals from helicopters for trophies.

n/t.

[Squatch]

18. Or those who sluice birds and bait bears.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

32. As you should.

I consider people who hunt like that the #1 reason for the invention of Stinger Missiles.

[Bluerthanblue]

48. you put your finger on what is disagreeable about Palin- I don't

have a problem with average people who hunt in 'reasonable' ways and who use the meat.

I have a problem with people who hunt recklessly, and who enjoy shoving the more graphic and disturbing aspects of the sport into peoples faces, for shock value. I don't appreciate hunters who hunt on private land without checking with landowners, or those who leave their empty 12pks behind either. But I know several responsible hunters, who get even more pissed than me when stuff like that happens.


:hi:

[slackmaster]

77. That seems reasonable to me

I have never hunted, other than fishing.

[Regret My New Name]

192. muderer...

[slackmaster]

274. The killer awoke before dawn,

He put his boots on.
He took a fish-killing stick from the ancient gallery
And then he
Walked down to the lake...

[bertman]

280. slackmaster, that was awesome!! Just awesome!! I love me some Doors.

How about this one:

When the still sea conspires with armor

True whaling is dead.

[EFerrari]

80. So, if you read most of these theads, you'll just find people agreeing with you. n/t

[AZBlue]

255. And those who want to eliminate certain species all together.

[AZ Criminal JD]

60. "with the woman"?

Would you say "with the black"?

[PDJane]

64. No.

But I might say "with the man."

[Regret My New Name]

195. how about "with the carbon based life form"?

[PDJane]

246. too long and not specific enough.

[progressivebydesign]

265. Hillary spent 16 years being called a "pig in a pantsuit" and you're freaking over "that woman" ?

Oh brother...

[madeline_con]

294. This is the first time I've heard it. n/t

[madeline_con]

293. No, but "with the man" probably. Geez! n/t

[yardwork]

2. It's evil to hunt wolves from helicopters with machine guns.

And it's evil to hunt polar bears.

Hunting caribous is fine. Hunting wolves is something else.

[carguy67]

24. machine guns?

Really? Oh you mean semi automatic rifles... Please people lets not use MSM "guns are evil" lingo.

The hunters are evil stuff is getting old but from the ignorance I've seen in some of the posts it's not going to change with many of the posters.

[yardwork]

94. .

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080830210012AAVwuqy

[carguy67]

131. And

They don't hunt them with "Machine guns". "Machine Guns" is a MSM phrase, nothing more. That is all I am getting at with this.

[yardwork]

154. I rarely hear the MSM say anything about hunting wolves.

If my use of the term "machine guns" is wrong or naive, I can accept that. I am not a weapons expert and never claimed to be. My point is that Sarah Palin has protected the rights of people to kill wolves while hunting in helicopters. I think that's evil.

I have no problem with folks hunting for food. In fact, I admire them. It takes a lot more effort to go out and hunt one's meat than to buy it at the supermarket.

However, hunting wolves - especially hunting them from helicopters - is evil.

[carguy67]

166. No problem

Just trying to educate some non-gun folks. As for the rest of it I am not going to step into the arena.

I am glad that you unlike many others can respect hunting for food. The only animals I have killed that were not food was 3 coyotes that had nearly killed my dog. They have a place in teh wild but they are not native to my area they were brought here in the 1800's and they tried to kill my dog, one of my best friends.

[yardwork]

249. I understand why you defended your dog - that is perfectly understandable.

I think that you'll find that most people here on DU respect those who hunt for food. There are also many gun enthusiasts here.

We now have coyotes in North Carolina. They were not here originally. They are taking over the niche left vacant when almost all the wolves native to North Carolina were killed. I am a big fan of wolves. They don't attack people. They usually eat rodents. They live in family groups and care for one another.

[carguy67]

253. Thanks

I am glad to see reasonable people with manners on the forum. Seems like to many would rather cuss or belittle you than have an honest discussion when it comes to topics such as this.

I can respect other points of view but rudeness I don't.

Almost moved to NC last year, things kind of fell a part. I love it up there very pretty state. Red Wolves are what you have (to a small degree now) correct? Is the bear population still healthy?

[yardwork]

256. Red wolves have been reintroduced to a few counties. They are very small - smaller than coyotes.

There are bears in North Carolina, especially in the western mountains and northeastern corner of the state. Occasional bears almost everywhere around here.

There are way, way too many deer here!

[carguy67]

259. Cool

I've always wanted to watch Red Wolves in the wild. I've shot thousands of deer with a camera and hope to get teh chance one day to observe and photograph Red Wolves in the wild.

[Vektor]

299. I accept hunting for food, even though I don't hunt.

I am a staunch Dem who has never been anti-gun, and while I have no qualms about upholding the second amendment, I think that trophy hunting or killing animals for sport is awful. It's not about the guns, it's about killing for the sake of killing, even when it's a non-food animal, and it's not necessary. This could easily be done with traps, bow and arrow, etc. "Trophy hunting" is wrong, IMHO.

That aside, I understand you defending your dog. I have encountered coyotes in the wild and thought they were cute. There is one that lives in a wildlife preserve near my house, and I visit there often - I like him.

However, I was less enamored with the coyotes that killed my beloved pet cat right in my own backyard some years back. She was a sweet gentle critter, and only a year old. I was absolutely horrified, and the neighborhood kids were scared witless after that happened.

I have a dog now, whom I love dearly, and my yard is totally fenced. :-) However, as much of an animal lover as I am, I imagine I'd tear limb from limb any creature that tried to harm my dog. So yeah, as much as it sucks that it had to come to that, I'm glad your dog survived, and you were there to intervene.

Do you still have the dog? Or was this a long time ago?

[carguy67]

302. Still have him

He was only about a year old when it happened, he's going to be turning three next month. They punctured a lung and broke 5 ribs. He had nearly bled out by the time I found him. Took him a week to be able to eat hard foods again, had to give him water with a eye dropper for three days.

He used to be able to run all day without tiring now he can only sprint for a bit before becoming winded. The vet was closed as it was sunday, I had to re inflate his lung and make do with human antibiotics until I could reach him monday morning.

[janx]

213. The definitions are all screwed up, and it's for a reason.

I've owned a semi-automatic rifle, but those who go overboard with guns like to lump that together with heavy assault weapons. This does nobody any good. It's not practical; it's emotional. People who assume those unfamiliar with firearms will take this without any suspicion are really stupid.

It's easy to assume that the people who are unfamiliar with and afraid of firearms are the ones who lump semi-automatic rifles with stuff like AK 47s. But that's not the case.

The day when the NRA became a political arm is a day that disgusted me.

[yardwork]

250. Thank you for that informative post.

I am almost completely unfamiliar with firearms, but I'm not afraid of them, and nor am I biased against them. I grew up in the country and knew people who hunted for food, as well as those who enjoyed target shooting. I know that some people enjoy collecting guns. My father had four. Most people who live in rural areas have at least one gun for protection, too. I have no problem with any of that.

My problem is with shooting animals for sport from helicopters, which I consider mindless slaughter. Entire families of wolves are killed in this way. That's evil.

I don't know much about people "who go overboard with guns" and I'm not sure whether this is really a big problem or not. My concern is with people who shoot wolves for sport.

I'm also disgusted with Governor Palin's falsifying of scientific evidence to deny polar bears federal protection. She's evil.

[slackmaster]

68. Who hunts anything with machine guns anywhere?

:shrug:

[yardwork]

96. Video

Here is a video of aerial shooting of wolves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr183lk-w...

[slackmaster]

107. "Gritty police procedurals get the online video treatment in this series..."

"...starring Michael Masden and George Hamilton."

:shrug:

[yardwork]

155. Are you saying that my link was a George Hamilton roll?

Sorry. }(

[slackmaster]

161. Yes, it was a George Roll

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I'm still interested to see if you have actual documentation of people hunting with automatic weapons. Other than maybe poachers in Africa.

[yardwork]

251. I'm not sure of the definition of "automatic weapon."

I said "machine gun" in my earlier post. I've learned in this thread that the term "machine gun" is obsolete. I think that my meaning was clear in context. I was not claiming to break any new information about specific weapons being used to hunt wolves and bears from helicopters. Anyone familiar with the practice understands what I meant.

[slackmaster]

272. Automatic weapon = Fires more than one round when the trigger is pulled

I've learned in this thread that the term "machine gun" is obsolete.

Odd that anyone would tell you that. The term is defined, as are other types of firearms, in the United States Code:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00005845----000-.html

[Regret My New Name]

199. US marines?

I need to shutup. I'm gonna get myself in trouble trying to be a smartass.

[Regret My New Name]

197. It's even more evil to hunt them with howitzers...

[yardwork]

254. ok, I get it. I think the meaning of my post was clear in context

even if I didn't use the correct terminology.

[Regret My New Name]

260. hehehe.. I wasn't actually being snarky or anything.. Just goofy.

[Mojambo]

4. I only hunt other human beings.

More sporting.

And delicious.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Agent William]

61. Yes!

I can't fucking stand it when hunters say they love the environment. Oh that argument makes sense; its just like OJ loving his wife so much he just had to kill her! They love the environment so much they are willing to kill a part of it for there own pleasure.

Nature Rapist, indeed.

[krispos42]

128. You really need your attitude adjusted.

Yeah, those terrible mean hunters and fishermen that want healthy populations of animals to get food with. How terrible! Imagine that, they want millions of acres of undisturbed, clean forests and prairies and rivers and lakes so they can run around in there a couple of weeks out of the years and take home meat that is void of added hormones or antibiotics, from free-range animals and fish.

Because it is so much better that letting animals such as deer simply explode in a predator-free environment until the entire population is starving, sick, and diseased. And killing hundreds more people a year in deer-car collisions.

Man, those hunters and anglers... truly sick individuals.

[Agent William]

289. Thats for the sarcasm, makes me feel all warm inside.

Wow, what an awesome motivation for conservation; preserve it so you can kill a small part of it. Really? Overpopulation? Tell me brave sir, what happened before heroic hunters were around to keep the deer from overpopulating and killing themselves? Natural predators perhaps? Oh wait Bear, Fox and wolves are worth more dead than alive (see furs). Oops silly me, I thought the best way to maintain equilibrium was a balance of predator and pray. Although you may not be guilty of killing predators, others are. I can't stand people who get hard ons by killing as many coyotes as wolves as they can, and then wonder why there are so many goddamn prey animals around. Interesting how its not bug news how in untouched wilderness there is no ungodly deer population explosion that can't be handled by endemic predators. In other words the population explosions are man made occurrence.

I do realize that certain people MUST hunt to stay alive, but others engage in hunting just to get blood on there hands, and for the pictures! < Now those are sick individuals.

[krispos42]

290. Yeah, keeping animal populations as a renewable resource

The horror of it all.

I thought the best way to maintain equilibrium was a balance of predator and pray.

Hmmm... looking at the picture, I see one each, predator and prey. Hint: the predator has the thunderstick.

[Agent William]

295. I'm sorry you feel that way.

I can say no more to you.

[madeline_con]

292. Yeah, yeah the starving animals.

Except hunters don't kill the weak sick ones. They want the healthiest, best specimen. The breeding male.

[carguy67]

301. Maybe some

Do but most I know along with myself shoot does without fawns to help contorl the over population around here. Does also is better to eat.

There are some who Trophy hunt, those ar the guys that get TV shows & magazines. That does not mean it represents us all. If you shoot trophy deer to mount then you have to spend several thousand dollars to have the mount made, not many can afford that or will pay it. The only Bucks I have ever shot were sick, hurt or had genetic problems. I haven't found antlers to taste all that good.

It's ok if you do not like trophy hunting, it is ok if you do not like hunting but please for use that hunt do not combine the two.

[Marr]

257. Ridiculous.

Responsible hunting or fishing is not "raping nature", and it's certainly not an expression of a disregard for it. Would you say the Native Americans hated nature because they hunted deer? Of course not. Humans are animals and a natural part of the environment. We belong there as much as the trees or the bears and we've every bit as much a right to eat.

I actually think that hunting and fishing *can* be an almost spiritual expression of that fact-- so long as the animal is treated with respect and not subjected to undue suffering.

There are certainly assholes out there who "hunt" because they just like to kill things. People like Cheney with his canned hunts, or so-called "trophy hunters". That's not hunting, that's just killing-- and it's sick.

[chatnoir]

70. How frickin true!

Nature rapist sums it about up.

Thx for the link!

[joshcryer]

83. Do you *know* how evolution works?

Have you heard of the disgrace that is Social Darwinism that has FUCKED human society for a century?

[cobalt1999]

5. When I grew up, it had me outside in nature.

Something I learned to appreciate and want to protect. Now, kids rarely even go outside.

Nice article about that disconnect.
www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/attenborough-alarmed-as-children-are-left-flummoxed-by-test-on-the-natural-world-882624.html

[Critters2]

87. Birdwatching does this for me...and nothing dies in the process. nt

[Kutjara]

6. On the plus side...

...maybe she'll go hunting with Cheney.

[Fearless]

7. It's not about hunting persay it's about irresponsible hunting...

Like taking down big game with helicopters and what not.

[LeftyMom]

8. Tough shit.

Killing other living beings for fun is sick.

[Squatch]

11. So, how does that non-biotic protein gruel taste?

Since you eat neither plants nor animals, being that they're "living beings" and all that jazz.

[LeftyMom]

17. Yep, that wheat I made into dinner cried a good long time and it took the tomatoes forever to bleed

out, while their little cherry tomatoes watched.

:eyes:

If you don't see the huge difference, something is deeply wrong with you.

[RadicalTexan]

21. Plants don't have central nervous systems, or brains, or relationships

Animals do.

[Squatch]

22. Thanks for the biology lesson, Einstein.

:eyes:

[RadicalTexan]

26. I'm not the one who equated plants with animals.

And you know nothing about my intelligence level. Resorting to sarcastic name-calling does nothing to make your point true.

[Squatch]

30. I didn't "equate" shit, genius.

I was pointing out the fallacy inherent in this statement, to which I was replying:

"Killing other living beings for fun is sick."

Now, while you may have a superb grasp of simple biological truisms, you might want to work on your reading comprehension.

[Critters2]

35. For the sake of accuracy, killing other living beings with central nervous systems is sick.

And then there's the fact that many, indeed most, fruits and vegetables are harvested at the end of their lifespan. When you start eating deer that died of old age, let me know. Until then, killing living beings for fun is sick.

[bobbolink]

51. Oh, good. I can tell all my Indian friends that "liberals" insist killing the animals they survived

on is "sick".

:crazy:

[Critters2]

82. Two responses: Palin can probably find a supermarket, and doesn't need to engage in a blood sport.

They probably have supermarkets even way up in Alaska.

There's a vast difference between killing for fun and killing for food. Native Americans in former times killed for food.

Now, we know enough about nutrition that eating meat is not necessary. Go over to the Tofu Ghetto and learn how many DUers eat just find without bloodshed.

Just curious...are many of your native friends running for VP?

[dlovato]

146. Not to mention every meat eater that votes...

If the plan is to attack meat eaters, then the plan basically attacks most voters (not just Republicans, but Democrats) - only vegetarians are "not attacked"....

Is vegetarians the only "group" of "eaters" Democrats welcome now?

Somehow I don't think that will get the Demo agenda in place... Nobody is going to vote for a party that only want's them to only eat tofu other than maybe 5% of the population that likes tofu. The other 95% will vote for the party that allows them to eat cows, chicken, deer, elk, etc.

- Darryl

[uberllama42]

189. It shows that you haven't spent much time on this board

if you think only vegetarians are "not attacked" here.

Stick around. You might enjoy the back-and-forth.

[progressivebydesign]

267. hunting for fun is evil.. people have repeatedly said it's okay for food. n/t

[Squatch]

55. Then I've got a scallop recipe you just have to try.

Since they don't have a central nervous system, I think killing and eating them would be compliant with your moral construct.

[cottonseed]

286. Many plants you're eating are industrial crops.

Many mice, raccoons, muskrats, owls, and a variety of birds are sucked into the combines during harvest. You're still killing animals.

[Odin2005]

12. Whould you rather have people dying in car accidents because of deer overpopulation?

Deer that are STARVING because of the overpopulation?

[LeftyMom]

20. Hunters oppose non-hunting deer management

I'm all in favor of non-lethal solutions, instead of manipulating populations to maintain the maximum numbers to shoot.

[Critters2]

38. And of reintroduction of natural predators. Environmentalists my ass! nt

[LeftyMom]

44. And the predators got killed off because they killed animals the hunters wanted to eat

or that ranchers wanted to raise for food.

Ultimately, the problem comes back to this: meat eating is not sustainable or environmentally responsible behavior for a large human population.

[Critters2]

84. Exactly. nt

[Rainbowreflect]

41. And we have an over population of deer because we are

killing off the wolves. When we kill off the predator the pray over populates.

[Critters2]

85. And "sport" hunters support the killing off of predator species. nt

[dlovato]

97. Re:And "sport" hunters support the killing off of predator species

NO - actually most hunters just support scientifically based management of predator species. i.e. controlling their population the same was we do with any other wildlife.
- Darryl

[madeline_con]

297. Overpopulation due to human habitat encroachment?

[FLAprogressive]

15. I'm not a big fan of hunting either....

...but sometimes it is necessary for population control. I think hunters ought to eat or put to use the animals they kill and not just kill them for the sake of it.

[LeftyMom]

Nature manages itself.

It really doesn't need human intervention, which only fucks things up.

Deer, for example, become overpopulated where their natural predators are killed off, and even then the main issue isn't too many deer, it's too many people wanting to live in places that were recently natural without adjusting their behavior in order to coexist.

[carguy67]

39. Nature

I guess you do not realise that humans are a part of nature. Yes human over population has caused issues with the deer density. Guess what? Humans, part of nature by hunting help to fix the problem. If they stop hunting then the poor deer either exhaust the food source and starve or die from diease due to over population. Man that sounds great.

[LeftyMom]

45. So you chase deer down and kill them with your bare hands?

It was nice of "nature" to supply you with the teeth to bite through hides to get to the raw flesh and the gut needed to eat uncooked flesh without fear of parasites.

God damn, do you have any idea how ignorant you sound when you post crap like that?

[carguy67]

47. So

Humans are not a part of nature? Is that what you are saying?

Do you live a 100% no nature impact life? Didn't think so, you are a part of it get over yourself.

[LeftyMom]

49. My impact is a hell of a lot lower than any omnivores.

And no, once humans developed the ability to manipulate their environment in a way that went far beyond transitory local impact, human behavior was no longer correctable by or attuned to natural systems.

[carguy67]

52. I can respect your views on that

If you could go into debates with stuff like that instead of attacking like you did earlier it goes along way.

Simple fact is though humans are a part of nature in that every house built, every factory run effect it. So unless humans die off or at least to population levels of thousands of years ago it will remain the way it is. With humans having to manage wildlife or letting it all die off as a result of our growth.

[slackmaster]

71. You think it's "unfair" for us to leverage our capacity to make and use tools?

Or the knowledge we have gained about making fire and cooking food?

If not for those abilities, there probably wouldn't be any humans now.

[LeftyMom]

72. No, but killing and eating feeling beings when there are better options is abhorrent.

Reveling in doing so would be a good indicator of a deep moral flaw at best or perhaps serious mental illness.

[slackmaster]

74. You seem overly concerned with the internal thought processes of other people

Reveling in doing so would be a good indicator of a deep moral flaw at best or perhaps serious mental illness.

I love reading posts by amateur Internet psychologists.

[LeftyMom]

79. Only to the extent that it drives harmful behavior.

It's the behavior I'm really worried about, and the consequences of that behavior, but changing it means understanding and changing the pathology behind it.

[slackmaster]

88. It's natural for prey animals like deer to be killed and eaten by predators

It may be harmful for the individual animals that get eaten, but that is their lot in life. Pressure from meat-eating animals helps keep them strong.

[LeftyMom]

91. From their natural predators, sure?

Real predators kill of the sick and the weak. Human hunters seek out the largest and healthiest for trophies or just for the most meat per tag. The former strengthens a herd, the latter destroys it.

[slackmaster]

98. I am opposed to hunting for trophies, but humans are in fact natural predators

Modern hunting without responsible management contributed to the destruction of the North American bison herds, but properly managed, controlled hunting is no threat to game animals.

[LeftyMom]

101. That whole attitude is the problem.

They aren't "game animals," are not a resource to be "managed" and simply aren't yours to kill or eat.

[slackmaster]

104. Would you prefer that hunting be completely unmanaged?

Would you feel better if I had called them prey animals?

Or are you really just pushing a vegetarian or vegan agenda here?

[LeftyMom]

120. I would prefer if human beings left wild animals the hell alone.

Clearly, human intervention in the lives of non-human animals hasn't worked out for their benefit, and I'm sick of people bullshitting and acting like they're conservationists or animal lovers or anything other than selfish douchebags because they kill animals. It's bullshit, and it's not fooling anybody.

[slackmaster]

125. It's impossible to do that and have things like housing, transportation, industry, and agriculture

For a large human population.

My own house sits on a pile of landfill, along with a few hundred others, in what used to be a relatively undisturbed canyon. I wish the place where I live had never been developed; it should have been preserved as open space, but the damage is done and nobody can turn the clock back.

...I'm sick of people bullshitting and acting like they're conservationists or animal lovers or anything other than selfish douchebags because they kill animals. It's bullshit, and it's not fooling anybody.

I'm all for minimizing the damage to natural systems and mitigating it wherever possible, but there are just too many of us living now to go back to the Pleistocene.

[LeftyMom]

162. But minimal interference is a good goal to work toward, no?

Obviously by existing we have an impact. But it's one thing to slap a house on an eighth of an acre, put roads in, etc, and quite another to actively go stomping through whatever woods are left killing whatever's managed to survive to that point.

[slackmaster]

167. To the extent that it doesn't affect my personal dietary choices, sure

;-)

...quite another to actively go stomping through whatever woods are left killing whatever's managed to survive to that point.

I'm all for leaving some areas completely untouched, but a lot of "natural" areas already have roads, trails, fire breaks, dams, etc.

North American prey animals are doing just fine under human management.

[LeftyMom]

170. Your choices end when they have unacceptable impact on others.

Otherwise, what's to stop somebody from deciding to eat you?

[carguy67]

177. Killing

Humans is a whole nother level.

Don't think so? Kid is drowning and a turtle is going to be hit by a car on the bridge you are walking a cross. Only have time to save one, which is it?

Let me guess the human right?

You like animals, great so do I.

You don't eat them, great we respect that.

You are not better than a meat eater, we know that because as law abiding Americans we are all equal.

[LeftyMom]

184. Killing any feeling animal is a moral evil. Doing so for selfish reasons is unacceptable.

Since eating other animals is perfectly avoidable, killing animals to eat them is selfish at best, and probably a good indicator of mental health concerns. Hunters have no denial, as supermarket meat eaters might, they know damn good and well that they're killers and morally culpable, and they do it anyhow. It's sick.

[carguy67]

194. So

I can go to Publix and buy a Feed lot animal that lived a horrible life and that is better than cutting out the middle man?

I can not raise & eat my own steer because if I kill it I am a worse person than the one who buys dead animal. I can not hunt to feed my family because Bambi needs parents...

No one is telling you how to live or eat. Do as you please, you saying that killing an animal makes me mentally instable is laughable.

[LeftyMom]

196. I know this is a novel concept, but you could try not eating corpses.

:shrug:

[carguy67]

203. Ok

I have some family who are vegans. They started out meat eaters, those that do not take pills daily have health problems. I like to workout and am quite healty, don't want to change a thing. I like meat more than I like veggies, don't get me wrong I eat them but could not live just off of that.

You still ignore what I am saying and keep going to killing is wrong...

[LeftyMom]

208. No, I'm not ignoring what you're saying- what you're saying is ignorant at best.

Apparently trying to explain ethical behavior to you is like trying to explain blue to somebody who was born blind. :shrug: I find it interesting, but deeply troubling, how you have such difficulty with such a simple and self-evident concept.

[carguy67]

215. So

The majority of the world, of America who does not follow your view is Ignorant at best. You are smarter and better than us all because you do not eat flesh? Man, that is one high horse you are on Ma'am.

Why do you have to be rude when people do not see things the way you do? Many people who dislike PETA, vegans, etc do so becuase of the attitude to you have towards me and others here.

[Big Blue Marble]

271. I have followed your discussion with Lefty Mom

She is not being rude or arrogant. She is asking you to consider compassion for other beings. Actually you
can still eat them if you choose but she is asking for you to at least own the pain you bring to them in
making your decisions.

I think you sound pretty insensitive. and somewhat threatened by her challenge. Of course you will deny this
but I have seen these arguments many times. These "arguments are rationalizations. I will assume that you
are young and haven't thought these issues through.

Be assured animals that are killed for food whether domestic or wild suffer sometimes horrendously so.
That may be OK for you, but for many of us it is unbearable and we have to stop eating them.

Your contributions to this discussion would be far more meaningful if you seemed compassionate towards
the non meat eaters and the animals.

[Matariki]

296. .

i'd disagree.

[dlovato]

222. re:I know this is a novel concept, but you could try not eating corpses.

I could, but I *like meat*, especially organic wild meat. If you like to eat only veggies, that's your choice - I don't care (I'm not trying to turn you into a meat eater) - just leave me alone in what I choose to eat.

Don't try to tell me I'm evil because of my choice of food. I have incisors (as does all humans) which are their for eating meat. I like to use those teeth for what they where meant for.

- Darryl

[LeftyMom]

228. Human incisors are vestigial.

And they're descended from our closest ape-like ancestors, who used them to compete for mates, as gorillas still do. Theirs are enormous for just that reason, even though they barely eat any animal matter.

Anthropology is a fun discipline. One learns all kinds of useful shit.

[slackmaster]

273. I get to define what is acceptable for me to eat.

You don't.

Otherwise, what's to stop somebody from deciding to eat you?

Legal consequences, plus I'd probably be kind of tough and gamey.

[dlovato]

130. Re: They aren't "game animals," are not a resource to be "managed" and simply aren't yours to kill o

Yes they are.

Humans eat meat. Deer/Elk/Etc are made of meat. Where's the disconnect?

A human killing a deer isn't any different than a Mountain Lion or Pack of wolves doing it - except humans do it more humanely.

Have you ever seen a Mtn Lion or Wolf kill then eat a deer - Hint, it's not necessarily in that order.

- Darryl

[LeftyMom]

135. Humans have a choice.

Your choosing the least compassionate option, or the fact that other animals have no choice (or the capacity to make one if they did) as a function of their biology does not in any way eliminate that choice or its moral implications.

[dlovato]

138. Hunting & At risk youth

If "at risk" youth where required to go hunting, kill something, gut it, and eat it....

I guarantee we'd have less gang problems.

Once you've seen what a "bullet does" after it hits a living creature, they would think twice before doing a gang "shooting". Hunter's and their kids who hunt know this. I'd love to see stats of kids who hunt and who don't - and how many of them are in gangs.

If you want to help our nations youth, create a program to get them into hunting.

Just like there are mandatory high school classes for Health, US government, etc - make one a hunting/gutting/cooking class. You would be surprised at what the results would be.

Many hunters would be willing to serve as mentors.

At a minimum the kids in the program would realize that the food they buy in the meat section at the grocery store "really" comes from. Seems like a lot of adults on this site doesn't quite get that simple process.

- Darryl

[flvegan]

153. Guess what.

Humans don't have to, and you friend are no fucking mountain lion. Humans choose to eat meat, whereas mountain lions have to. Big difference.

[LeftyMom]

157. "You are no fucking mountain lion"

You crack me up. Remind me to stay on your good side. :*

[flvegan]

175. I have to say that I think that is my favorite STUPID justification.

Ever seen a lion kill a gazelle? Lions eat meat in the wild. WE'RE JUST LIKE LIONS!!!11!! If we were in the wild, we'd be chasing down gazelles as obligate predators and ripping out their throats with our meat-rendering teeth!

Idiots.

[carguy67]

158. And

Humans don't need cars. We should not make horses work because it's mean so we should all walk.

You can be vag if it makes you happy I won't change you and you won't me.

Here are facts though. Cows, chickens, etc would not even be alive at this point if everyone went Veg. Cows are a dumb animal and would die out quickly and chickens the "I think I can fly" birds would be right there with them. Sadly the business of eating keeps them alive. It's not a like a pet dog or cat.

[flvegan]

169. Brilliant.

The business of suffering keeps them alive. Oh, loud applause from me.

Eating meat is easily replaced by most, and for most, using a car is not easily replaced.

Next!

[carguy67]

186. Ok

So then what happens to them? Government buys them all and keeps them on a nice farm that the tax payers pay for and they live happily ever after? Sorry but that is not how it works. If you want to believe otherwise then that's swell, beleive it. Once something has no use it is replaced with something of use.

[flvegan]

190. Sigh.

Happens to what? Farm animals? Right, because everyone will go vegan with a *snap* of the fingers, yes? It's called attrition or, if you have any sort of economical sense, based in supply-and-demand theory.

Next!

[carguy67]

201. Ok then

You just said earlier that I can't eat meat because it makes me evil. So What should I do with the animals? I can't sell them or someone else might eat them... What to do, what to do. Do you want them?

I want to be a better person like you, why won't you help me?

I own a business I understand S&D. Once the D is gone the animals will be too. They are Domestic farm animals with no survival abilities.

[flvegan]

204. I never said "can't"

I have no rule over you. Did you read my response about supply and demand, Mr. Big Business? As demand dwindles (not disappear completely on day one) supply will dwindle in response. Did I say that slowly enough for you, Trump?

[carguy67]

216. I know that

Then what happens to the domestic farm animals that have not had to survive on their own for thousands of years? They are gone. So either they live and die like everything and everyone in this world or they never live at all.

You keep saying eating meat is wrong. Who made vegans rulers of morals? It is something that you believe it is your opinion.

[LeftyMom]

202. Damn, that was just about every stupid argument in favor of animal exploitiation, in one subthread.

Oh wait, he forgot "Plants feel pain! Won't somebody please think of the baby carrots!"

[carguy67]

207. Silly

Baby carrots are big carrots cut down... So they couldn't feel anything, they are already killed

[LeftyMom]

209. No shit.

I know the person I'm posting to knows that. Hence the joke.

[carguy67]

214. As

Does everyone, jeeze. Just becuse we don't agree on eating animals I didn't know i meant I couldn't kid around either... I'm sorry I'll try not to post where you post.

You don't agree with me, I don't agree with you. Does that mean we are enemey's? If so let me know becuase that is not something I am used to. I can be friendly with people who have other views.

[LeftyMom]

219. It just seemed like you were implying that either I or flvegan didn't know that.

It struck me as condescending (my apologies if that wasn't intended.) And while I frankly don't care if people like us or not, because we can be assholes, you'll find that we're definitely two of the smartest and best informed assholes on DU.

But no, I'm a big kid, I realize people disagree, and while I'm Italian enough to nurse a grudge with the best of them, it takes a lot more than a difference of opinion to get on my bad side.

[carguy67]

223. Glad

That we can get along despite our differences on this matter.

I'm Italian as well, so I gotcha there.

[Fattys Mom]

241. But what about.......

The animals that are killed due to growing crops? Farmers (including organic ones) regularly call in hunters to kill animals that are eating crops. Animals are killed with farm equipment used to cultivate and harvest crops as well. Unless you are growing fruits and vegetables yourself then a vegetarian or vegan diet is not cruelty free. It is just hidden better.
How many bunnies had to die for your tofu?

[flvegan]

245. "Hidden better"?

Give Fatty my regards and apologies. No such thing as cruelty free, but it's pretty good to do our best.

How much global warming assistance was given and how many animals died because we had to wipe out part of the Amazon to feed the cows for your diet?

[Fattys Mom]

261. I don't eat cows...

I grow most of my own food by hand and what I don't grow I barter for with my neighbors when I can. I have not touched an animal product in years and my animals are vegan as well. Nothing has to die for me to live. I am terrified of spiders but I let my partner move several egg sacks to a place where they would survive the winter. Where do your convictions lie?

[flvegan]

283. My convictions lie

in being suspicious of posters that say this:
How many bunnies had to die for your tofu?

You will, I trust forgive me.

[LeftyMom]

268. That one goes on the list too.

A lot more plant matter goes into growing a pound of edible animal tissue than a pound of edible plant matter, so more land under cultivation is needed for meat-centered diets than plant-centered ones.

For example, the vast majority of the corn and soy grown in this country go into animal feed, very little is used in the most efficient and healthful manner- feeding humans directly.

[Fattys Mom]

275. exactly...

If we spent less time growing food for animals doomed to be killed for American's blood lust then we could eliminate factory farming of all types. If we all stop eating meat and using animal products then we can scale down the farms to more manageable sizes that can be farmed by hand. It would create more jobs and would be less of an impact on the environment.

[krispos42]

279. That is very true

The reason that many parts of the world keep goats, for example, is because they can turn uncultivated and unedible crops like grass into food for humans; namely, milk and meat. This adds to your food supply.

However, America already makes more food than we need to eat so the more wasteful process of us converting a portion (a large portion, probably) of our grains into meat does not limit our domestic food supply.


And the problem with the international food supply is that, basically, they can't afford to buy our food. The people of Africa, for example, are dealing with drought and the encroaching desert. Tribal and civil wars for the remaining resources. Genocide. And yet, despite these facts the population of the continent does not go down.

Thom Hartmann makes a very good point when he says that the best way to control explosive population growth is to empower women in sexist cultures. I think that is what ultimately needs to be done if we're going to save ourselves. Recognize and exercise equal rights for women, get birth control, let women exercise their inheirent rights over their bodies. Get things under control, flatten out the birth rate, reduce or eliminate the pressures that cause war and genocide, then get organized and get prosperous.

And get rid of the IMF and bring in microfinancing.

[G_j]

178. sorry

wolves kill the weakest, humans often aim for the healthiest.

the long term results are very different!

[dlovato]

103. Re:No, but killing and eating feeling beings when there are better options

And those better options are?

I didn't realize you had a degree in wildlife biology. :-)

Please let us know how we are supposed to manage those species.

- Darryl

[LeftyMom]

123. By staying out of their habitats as much as possible and letting nature heal.

Nature doesn't need human management- it got along just fine without us.

[krispos42]

136. Abhorrent... to you

Two words that should be added to many of the posts in this thread.

[LeftyMom]

172. Causing completely avoidable pain to feeling beings is abhorrent, period.

That's not even really debatable.

[krispos42]

180. Causing completely unnecessary pain to feeling beings is abhorrent, period.

That's not even really debatable.

[LeftyMom]

210. Exactly. And since humans don't need to eat meat, hunting fits the bill.

:shrug:

[krispos42]

277. I think we'll just lay it to rest there, then

We've hit an impasse. Further discussion would only be inflammatory. :-)

[dlovato]

225. RE:Causing completely avoidable pain to feeling beings is abhorrent, period

Youd rather them get torn apart by a mtn lion while they are alive - Hunters are doing deer a favorable - much less painful to be shot (and quicker) than have a lion/wolf/etc tear you apart.

[LeftyMom]

276. I might get cancer when I'm old. That's not an excuse to shoot me now and eat my body.

:shrug:

[flvegan]

182. Right because

"killing and eating feeling beings when there are better options is abhorrent" really is simply a matter of choice. Kind of like voting for douchebag Republicans when there are better options is abhorrent, I suppose.

[krispos42]

278. They are not sentient

And they're on the bottom of the food chain. Therefore I don't worry about it overmuch.


Dunno. Maybe I'll have the kind of epiphany you did and have the drive and ability to make a total lifestyle change.

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be in the cards.

:-(

[flvegan]

284. You should check your definition of sentient.

Get back to me on that.

[Irreverend IX]

152. Why so worked up about "morality?"

Saying that it's "natural" for predators to kill prey animals but that it's unnatural and immoral for humans to kill prey animals is silly. Morality is a human construct that has no more bearing on the natural world than God and little Baby Jesus do. History provides abundant evidence that hunting is natural human behavior. A moral code that prohibits it is no more rational than a moral code that prohibits sex outside marriage.

[LeftyMom]

174. Because to the extent that we can structure our actions to avoid causing harm, we should.

That's just common decency, if not common sense.

[Irreverend IX]

262. You say it's abhorrent to cause pain to feeling beings...

If that's the case, you should promote hunting, because it prevents feeling beings from experiencing pain. Getting shot by a hunter is probably the most quick and painless way a wild animal can die. The "natural" ways for an animal to die are a lot less pleasant. An animal that's seized and ripped apart by predators experiences extreme terror. Disease is a very painful way to go, and starvation is much more so. A well-placed bullet will cause an animal a bit of pain, shock and confusion at worst, and at best (a head shot that destroys the brain) the animal will feel nothing at all before dying. So why aren't you encouraging more people to hunt so that more game animals can die much more painless deaths than they otherwise would.

[carguy67]

76. Noting is fair

Unless everything is equal it seems... :eyes:

[Thothmes]

65. Vast majority of hunters that I know do infact eat what they kill

In some cases they will donate the meat to a local homeless shelter.

[chatnoir]

67. Thank you

:thumbsup:

[slackmaster]

69. Don't just eat a hamburger, EAT THE HELL OUT OF IT!

:hi:

[Ex Lurker]

139. good luck winning any red states, or even any mildy purple ones with that attitude

I trust Obama doesn't share it.

[Xenotime]

176. Exactly.

Then when you add to the fact that it involves rare or endangered animals makes it that much more cruel. Animals are worth more to the community alive than dead.

[LaurenG]

10. I am not a hunter but I am pro 2nd amendment

I wouldn't kill a creature unless it was accidental or my family was starving to death in the middle of winter, and since I am basically a vegan it would devastate me. I try not to infringe my viewpoint on anyone but I was anti hunting long ago, since birth probably, or at least since I found out meat was an animal. Oh and Ms. Palin had nothing to do with it either.

[spoony]

28. I feel much the same way

I stopped eating meat when I found out what it was, and though I too am pro-2nd Amendment I don't get hunting at all. I had the rare joy of seeing a doe and her two little ones in the woods behind my house a few days ago, and wondered what goes through a hunter's mind to allow them to pull the trigger.

[bullwinkle428]

13. I know of a few deer hunters here in Iowa involved with

food donation such as this program:

http://www.iowadnr.com/other/hush/index.html

However, the ones that are simply looking for a trophy, cutting off heads or antlers and leaving the rest to rot, etc., are vile wastes of skin...

[Critters2]

43. Those vile wastes of skin are the great majority. nt

[Redneck Socialist]

108. No they're not. And it's illegal in every state in the US to do that. n/t

[Squatch]

14. I enjoy hunting immensely.

It's a great way to reaffirm my position in the food chain.

[tkmorris]

36. Your need to affirm your position in the food chain....

That does not speak well of you. Do you really need to show squirrels who is boss?

[Squatch]

40. Have you ever had squirrel stew?

Mmmmmmm. Yummy.

[tkmorris]

50. Sure, though simple pan fried is preferable. However..

I never felt I needed to prove anything to the squirrel.

[lonestarnot]

16. And I'm not getting but am sick of trophy hunters.

:puke:

[datasuspect]

19. if you’re in a survival situation,

the only thing you need to know about a spotted owl is that it tastes like chicken

[depakid]

23. Trophy hunting isn't the same as the usual deer, elk and angling deal

[dlovato]

111. Re:Trophy hunting isn't the same as the usual deer, elk and angling deal

Its' pretty close. I get a deer tag every year.

Rather than shoot the first "legal" deer I see, I CHOOSE to wait (sometimes means I don't get anything at all) for a more mature deer than necessary per Fish & Game Requirements. Does that make me a "trophy" hunter? Does that mean that choosing to wait for a mature (vs younger) deer is more evil in your skewed version of reality?

The fact that people pursuing "trophy animals", who are MORE selective than the general hunting public, is a GOOD thing. I still eat what I get - so I don't see the difference if it has "big horns" or "little horns".

- Darryl

[depakid]

200. "I still eat what I get"

;)

Those who set radio collared hounds on cougars, only to walk up and shoot the cat out of a tree for its head- or those who simply want to kill a bear for a rug- or for sale of a gall bladder to superstitous folks- or simply for thr thrill of the kill- my thoughts are that's a bit of a different deal, don't you think?

[Warpy]

25. There is subsistence hunting in my state

and this is a poor state and that elk or deer in the freezer is a necessary source of protein for a lot of families. If they don't bag anything, it's beans and chicken and squirrel and maybe they'll get lucky and someone will share some goat with them come spring.

However, that's different from the rich out of state trophy hunters who come to take heads and leave the bodies behind. It's also different from the Cheney type "hunters" who shoot tame animals in enclosures.

Subsistence hunters here are great environmentalists. Trophy hunters are generally scum who don't live here, so what the hell.

[RadiationTherapy]

27. I don't hunt and I am very judgemental of those who do.

But I keep it to myself, mostly.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stillcool]

33. I don't get it either...

she lives in Alaska and fishes and hunts. What a shocker! I'm more concerned with her capability as a VP than I am with her hunting prowess.

[Fumesucker]

34. Hunting is necessary now that we have largely eliminated the predator

Species that kept prey species in check.

I do think that people who take pleasure in killing just for the sake of killing aren't wrapped entirely tight.

I hunt birds from time to time with a looong telephoto lens.

My two granddaughters and I got within about eight or ten feet of a very large hawk just sitting on the ground today. Close enough that my eight year old granddaughter got some quite good pics with a cell phone camera. We were out bike riding on a bike trail and got off to take a break and get a drink and I spotted the hawk just kind of hopping across the ground and we stalked right up to it. There are peacocks near where we saw the hawk and it was so big I thought it was a peacock at first.

I've never been so close to such a large raptor before and my granddaughters were both highly pumped by the encounter. A unique experience for them and for me. We've done the same thing with geese before but that's just not quite the same.

[roguevalley]

37. for me, hunting is evil. for someone else, its their favorite passtime.

My opinion has just as much weight as anyone else's and I tend to let whomever have their say on passtimes like this. For some, hunting is murder. Jains? So. Don't let it bother you unless having a contrary opinion and expressing it -even with passion- is not allowed. Hunters are just as vocal and passionate. We cancel each other out.

[BPowell]

46. There is no earthly reason to hunt.

It's much more efficient to grow or purchase your food. It's also much safer. Every year we have the Pumpkin Army running around the woods shooting everything that moves. And every year we have people killed by these nuts. What could be the thrill in shooting a helpless animal? Grow up people.

[carguy67]

57. There is no earthly reason

For much of what humans do. Why whatch someone play football on tv? It's a waste of time and you do not get any exercise yet people watch.

Why do we need 4 hundred dollar phones and Ipods? we dont.

The only NEEDS in live are Air, Food, Water & Shelter. Everything else is a bonus.

[chatnoir]

81. Next time football turns into players getting gunned down for kicks

let me know

:eyes:

[carguy67]

90. K

Where did the post discuss the loss of human life or the harming of humans? It was about necessity so do not change the topic. If you want to discuss that then lets.

Animal life being equal to human? You can say it but to you believe it truly in your heart?

You see a kid drowning and a turtle about to be hit by a car and can only save one? So which is it?

The growth of humanity has screwed up nature, we as humans are a part of the balance of nature. Usually for the worse, yet still a part of it. As the Growth of humanity continues at this rate, a rate much faster than nature can respond to humans have to step in to help manage wildlife or watch all of the animals die off.

[chatnoir]

141. Both unnecessary absolutely

But not in the same realm as the one is violent, resulting in a killing, the ending of life and very one-sided.

I did not compare human and animal life. All life is sacred in my view.

Going with your last point, I think humans have screwed up the planet and thrown it remarkably out of whack, but as to nature if left alone it is remarkably self-sufficient in finding its balance and fairly self-regulating. I don't think more killing is the answer.

[carguy67]

142. Ok

I respect that.

Are you against others eating meat? Some are some are not. If you are not then what is the difference in the deer I shoot that never feels a thing or the steer that I shoot that never feels a thing? Both feed my family.

[Fumesucker]

168. Actually there is a reason to hunt

The predator species are just about gone.. Without predators, prey species multiply to the point they exhaust their food sources and then they starve en masse, millions of them.

Starving is a nasty way to die, worse I think than being killed with a bullet.

Nature is so far out of whack now, thanks to man, that hunting really is a necessity in order to restore some modicum of balance to the ecosystem.

[Codeine]

217. You kill animals just as dead.

But you make them suffer endlessly first. At least the hunter lets 'em live for a while in the open spaces of nature. You shove 'em in a box and torture them 'til they're big enough to kill.

[elshiva]

240. You DO have a reason if you are living in the

middle of the Amazon Rainforest and there are no supermarkets. I know you all are thinking about affluent North Americans, but still... If you're out in middle of nowhere, you gotta eat something besides just leaves...

buffy/

"McCain bites."

[XOKCowboy]

42. Lets not forget the work of DucksUnlimited, Trout Unlmtd, RM Elk Foundation

and hundreds of other organizations of hunters that contribute to preservation of wetlands, free flowing stream preservation, habitat preservation. Not to mention that hunting and fishing license fees are the major funding for state wildlife departments.

[dlovato]

117. Re: Lets not forget the work of DucksUnlimited, Trout Unlmtd, RM Elk Foundation

Damn Right - but even more than all that - lets not forget the excise tax on sporting goods (guns/fishing poles) etc - more money is raised for wildlife protection/conservation in the US than any other source. Get rid of hunters, and there will be little, if any to save spotted owls, salamanders, and a bunch of other species.

- Darryl

[XOKCowboy]

140. Watch out!

You've got a low post count and you're marking yourself as a hunter. They're both evil around here. Prepare to be called a freeper, animal abuser and worse. I just hope that you're not a Nascar fan also. *horror*

As for me, Welcome to DU! My point has always been that there is a large portion of the country that doesn't consider hunting as evil. To use this part of her very skeptical background to attack her will not resonate with the majority of Americans.

[kwolf68]

133. For Ducks Unlimited

It's purely for selfish reasons, but I am glad they protect the habitat of the animals they wish to kill. That's cool.

As far as state wildlife departments...don't even get me started. In most cases, they exist for one reason: to maximize the number of hunting opportunities.

I'll leave my personal view of hunting out of it, but the science behind the management (that I've been involved with) was terribly flawed. I left a job because the entire agenda was to pander to the hunting interests. The animals, or the environment itself NOT ONE SINGLE time was of concern.

Again, it is what it is...I left that job, but learned a lot.

[XOKCowboy]

163. It may be purely for selfish reasons

but DU has done more than any other private organization to buy and restore wetlands in critical waterfowl flight paths. I think that by doing so they've benefited the waterfowl population much more than they're harmed it by providing hunting opportunities. Besides anybody who duck hunts is a masochist.

I'd be interested to know what state you're referring to. In Colorado they do a decent job of monitoring deer/elk populations and limit or deny the permits in areas of concern. WY and MT are the same from all reports I've read. None will let you indiscriminately kill any or as many animals as you want and they enforce their game laws to the extent of their funding. One other thing to consider is that when the majority of your funding comes from hunters and fishermen then yes your focus might be a bit skewed. In the before mentioned states, hunting brings in major revenue to thousands of small communities during hunting season apart from the license and excise taxes. None of those people or any real hunter want the wildlife to be hunted to extinction.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

53. Personally, I can never imagine myself hunting

I am opposed to the trophy hunters, but certainly can understand the concept of subsistance hunting.

I latched onto this issue because I know I can use it to sway some low-info voters I know who are animal lovers . If they are considering voting for McGramps and the Beauty Queen, I'll use any tool I can fdind

[SoCalDem]

54. You are allowed to feel that..It's America

and some of us are allowed to also feel that it's just plain nasty to go around killing innocent animals who are just trying to stay alive & care for their young in an increasingly hostile (to them) world.

Most people can find plenty of food these days without having to tramp around in the wilderness ambushing foraging animals :)

[2Design]

56. exactly nt

[dlovato]

150. My goodness...

> Some of us are allowed to also feel that it's just plain nasty to go around killing innocent animals who are just trying to stay alive & care for their young in an increasingly hostile (to them) world.

You are allowed to "feel" however you want - this IS America...

> Most people can find plenty of food these days without having to tramp around in the wilderness ambushing foraging animals

Sure - you can go to the store and buy "Cow parts" that someone else killed, gutted, and cut apart for you, throwing away the head and horns - I just choose to do that "dirty work" myself as much as possible.

I really think that many of the "Anti-Hunters" posting here are well meaning - just misguided and disconnected from the reality of where their food comes from and what it takes to go from the "range" to their "happy meal".

- Darryl

[stray cat]

58. No problem with hunting for food. Not crazy about killing elephants for their tusks.

or mass killing of wolves from helicopters.

[Sebastian Doyle]

59. I would say it depends on your motivation

I don't see a problem with someone hunting to feed their family. It's what everyone's ancestors did before you could pick up a couple steaks at Safeway, so unless you're a vegetarian/vegan, you're eating an animal that somebody killed. And plants are living things too, so even the vegans are "killers" in that sense.

But then there's those who consider hunting a sport, and kill simply for the sake of killing. In my humble opinion, those people need a mental health evaluation. I'm sure many will disagree, but that's America.

[hlthe2b]

62. hunting to be used for food (by hunter or someone else)

is in no way evil. However, IMO, sport hunting solely for trophy heads is among the most barbaric behavior we, humans, have ever adoped.

[joshcryer]

86. It still is for most people who take pride in hunting.

A box of bullets and a gun will feed you for a decade. There's a reason the poorest people out there take pride and enjoy hunting, it's fucking cheaper. Try buying the same quantity of beef for the amount of venison you can get in one season. It would cost thousands and thousands of dollars.

[hlthe2b]

164. Yes.. and they have my total respect...

(as long as they take the time to learn to deliver a "clean shot" for rapid kill)

[joshcryer]

300. I see no requirement for a "rapid kill."

Nature provides no such "mercy" and neither should humans who hunt (I say this because of my desire to learn to hunt big game with only rudimentary handmade weapons, like we awful humans used to do a long time ago; I don't think I should feel 'guilt' for this). Not saying that humans can't, but that it shouldn't be a prerequsite. It is often desirable to get a clean kill in, if only so that you're not carrying a very bloody carcass out of the woods.

[hlthe2b]

304. You don't feel any compunction towards humane kill and

doing everything possible to avoid unnecessary suffering? You don't feel it necessary to practice your aim or bow skills, or whatever you are using in order to do so? Really??????? I find that hard to believeI really do.




If true, I feel for you. Humaity may have skipped a beat.

[flvegan]

63. Pity.

[Igel]

66. Agreed.

My kid--he's a bit over 4 1/2 years old--came into where I was typing on my 'puter and said, "Hunters are evil. They're bad men."

I have no idea what kid's show he got that from. No clue. If I knew, either that channel would vanish from the tv or I'd take the tinsnips to the DVD.

I said that I'd hunted and fished in prior years. My hunting was weak and ineffectual, so it didn't impact much. But whenever I fished and caught an invasive species of fish, I'd just whack it's head on a rock and pitch it back for fish food; otherwise I followed the regs and ate what I caught. Helped gut and butcher sheep a time or two (I'd rather butcher them than shear them), or friends' deer. Once even had the "good fortune" of helping a friend kill a couple hundred chickens; you want a bloody orgy of death and blood letting, there you have it (we chased them down, chopped off their heads, hung'm up by their feet to drain as they thrashed, took off the feet, skinned them and gutted them--plucking was just too much work).

Tyke was outraged. I told him that he'd have pretty much an all-vegetable diet then No hot dogs, no corn dogs, no chicken strips, no hamburgers, no sausages, no turkey, no tuna or other fish, no BBQ beef, since they come from animals.

He reconsidered. And I'm still looking for that "hunting is evil" show.

[RB TexLa]

73. Just mention Ann Richards, might calm some of them down.

[Annces]

75. Hunting is Evil

[slackmaster]

78. And we all know the Inuits have never, ever hunted

Especially sea mammals.

:rofl:

[Redneck Socialist]

112. LOL! That's the funniest thing I've seen on DU in a long time!

Thank you!


:rofl:

[dlovato]

89. Economic benefits of hunting...

Here's some facts to ponder if you are going to "make a stand" against hunting...

Rassumsen <www.rasmussenreports.com > lists the following states as current "toss ups" in the presidential election in their electoral college tracking...

Colorado, Nevada and Virginia -- are pure toss-ups. So lets look at them in detail...

But first, here's the National economic contribution made by sportsmen (Anglers & Hunters)...

* If the $76 BILLION that sportsmen spend on hunting and fishing where the Gross domestic product of a country, sportsmen as a nation would rank 57 out of 181 countries. (do the dem's really want to eliminate that much gross domestic product from the US?)

* That accounts for 1.6 MILLION jobs (do the dem's really want to eliminate that many jobs?) Which accounts for $60 BILLION in salaries and wages AND 25.6 BILLION in Federal/State and Local taxes (do the dems want to eliminate that?)

OK - now just looking at the 3 "pure tossups"...

COLORADO
---------
• Sportsmen support more jobs in Colorado than Colorado Springs-based Allstate Insurance Co. (20,000 jobs vs. 17,286).
• Annual spending by Colorado sportsmen is two and a half times more than the combined revenues of the Colorado Rockies and Denver Broncos and Nuggets
($1.2 billion vs. $463 million).
• Annual spending by Colorado sportsmen is more than the cash receipts from dairy, greenhouse/nursery, corn and hay combined ($1.2 billion vs. $1.18 billion).
• Colorado sportsmen outnumber the population of Denver (593,000 vs. 558,000).

NEVADA
-------
• Sportsmen support as many jobs in Nevada as the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police (5,000 jobs).
• Annual spending by Nevada sportsmen is more than the revenues of Henderson based Zappos.com, one of the fastest growing companies in the state ($417 million vs. $381 million).
• Nevada sportsmen annually spend more than the cash receipts from cattle, hay, dairy, onions and potatoes, the state’s top five agricultural commodities ($417 million vs. $406 million).
• More people hunt and fish in Nevada than get married in Las Vegas (182,000 vs. 110,000).

VIRGINIA
-------
• Sportsmen support more jobs in Virginia than Northrop Grumman in Newport News and Virginia Tech University combined (24,000 jobs vs. 23,000).
• Annual spending by Virginia sportsmen is more than the combined revenues of Southside Oil, Uppy's Convenience Stores, Apex Systems, and Lumber Liquidators - the state's four fastest growing companies grossing over $100 million ($1.3 billion vs. $932 million).
• Sportsmen spend more in Virginia than the combined cash receipts from broilers, cattle and dairy products - the state's top three agricultural commodities ($1.3 billion vs. $1.2 billion).
• Virginia sportsmen annually spend $175 million on outboard boats and engines to get out on the water and around the marshes for fishing and hunting.
• Virginia sportsmen could fill both Richmond International Raceway and Martinsville Speedway nearly 5 times (857,000 vs. 177,000).

Now... Do you really want to make hunting illegal? Do you want to impose ANY additional restrictions on hunting?

McCain just solidified the votes of many hunters with his VP pick - pulling hunters who are democrats, undecided, and solidified the republican hunter base. Sorry to say, but it was a brilliant move on his part. Dems can go "ani-hunting more than usual, but that will only make things worse for Obama...

- Darryl

[carguy67]

93. You can't

Bring facts into this and expect to win an emotional debate.

[dlovato]

95. RE:You can't

> Bring facts into this and expect to win an emotional debate

Probably right... But it doesn't hurt trying to "educate" people. Humans are animals, Omnivores to be exact (which means we can eat both plants and meat).

Hunter's just do "directly" what your grocery store and the slaughter house do for most people. Out of sight, out of mind. I suppose most people would rather not think the Big Mac they ate was once a cute little calf who grew up (mostly in not great conditions and, had a final trip to a slaughter house where it had ZERO chance of coming out alive.

But, you are right - most people think their t-bone steak originated from the back of the local grocery store, and was always sitting on styrofoam wrapped in plastic.

Unbelievable. Really it is. Has "Civilization" removed "humans" from how things really are this much?

- Darryl

[Skittles]

102. it's not the eating of meat that bothers me

it's the fact that there are people who think slaughtering animals is a fun, swell thing to do that makes me utterly sick

[carguy67]

105. A

A deer dis shot and eaten.

A cow is transported to a sale, lives on a feed lot (not a pleasant place to live) and is slaughtered.

Difference?

The deer gets the best ticket out.

[Skittles]

109. difference is

one is a job, the other SOMEONE VOLUNTEERS TO DO IT FOR FUN :puke: WHY CAN'T HUNTERS EVER ADMIT THEY ENJOY KILLING ANIMALS?

[carguy67]

118. One the

Animal is guaranteed to suffer

The other the animal does not know what happed (a good hunter)

If I choose to not buy meat and get my own then it is a job I task myself with instead of hiring out. Is that not correct?

How is it different than a farmer raising a steer to butcher? It isn't.

I don't hunt to kill, haven't shot anything in the past 3 season. I hunt because I enjoy the other aspects of it. Managing my property and killing off deer when the population is high, a deer is injured, sick, has bad genetics is helping nature not hurting.

[dlovato]

122. Re: WHY CAN'T HUNTERS EVER ADMIT THEY ENJOY KILLING ANIMALS

Because we DONT "ENJOY KILLING". The actual "killing" part really isn't fun (pulling the trigger, ending a life) - just a necessary part of the process. The Hunt is fun - but there is a lot more to a "hunt" than the split second you kill something.

Gutting an animal isn't much "fun" either. Just part of the process.

Is buying a bunch of t-bones at a store for a cook out fun? Does having a slaughter house do the "messy, but necessary work" FOR YOU - vs doing it yourself - FUN?

- Darryl

[Skittles]

183. LIE!!!!!!!!

OMG!!!! JUST ADMIT YOU LOVE HUNTING, YOU LOVE KILLING ANIMALS! ADMIT IT!!!!! :rofl:

By the way, I don't buy meat for cookouts either - just not a meat fan.

[LWolf]

92. Yes.

Just as those who abhor killing for sport are "annoyed" at the sight of the possible vp of the U.S. surrounded by trophy heads, skins, etc..

If you take Palin out of the mix, it's really about what constitutes a valid reason to kill. There is no consensus, so you'll see plenty of annoyed people from various sides in that debate.

[Skittles]

99. I don't think it is evil

disgusting, yes

[DutchLiberal]

100. Hunting for 'sport' IS evil. Period.

[carguy67]

106. The life

Commercial raise animals go through on feed lots is more humane?

[Skittles]

110. YOU ENJOY KILLING ANIMALS

WHY CAN HUNTERS NEVER ADMIT THIS???

[Redneck Socialist]

119. The hypocrisy of people keeping their hands clean by buying meat at the grocery store...

doesn't bother you, but hunting does? Color me confused.

[DutchLiberal]

124. When will this NON-argument ever die??

Look, I'm a vegetarian, okay, but your 'reasoning' doesn't make any sense. There's a BIG difference between killing animals for FOOD and for FUN ('sport'), okay? The first has an objective, the latter has NONE.

[Redneck Socialist]

132. It's all food

How is having someone else kill your animals for you morally superior to killing your food yourself? It is illegal in every state in the country to kill an animal and not harvest the meat. People who don't do that aren't hunters, they are criminals.

I know exactly were my meat comes from. The blood is quite literally on my hands. I'd like to think that I'm living a more honest life than the unthinking masses who kill, albeit indirectly, countless cattle and other livestock so that they can pick up their steaks with no fuss at the grocery store.

[DutchLiberal]

144. Maybe you have trouble reading: I said 'hunting for fun/as sport'.

[Redneck Socialist]

242. You can't separate hunting from food

Again I ask why is it better to have someone else kill your calories for you? Is a cow's life somehow less valuable than a deer's?

[Skittles]

179. SEE

you STILL can't admit it :rofl:

[Redneck Socialist]

238. And you STILL can't answer the question

Why is shooting a deer with a bullet bad, and shooting a cow in the head with a steel bolt ok?

[Skittles]

285. LOL I DON'T CARE FOR EITHER ONE

YOU SIMPLY ASSUME IT BECAUSE YOU ARE SO HOT TO TROT TO EXCUSE THE FACT THAT YOU ENJOY KILLING ANIMALS - something you will NEVER admit - you cannot excuse your thirst for killing animals using a defense that OTHER PEOPLE kill animals too! JUST FUCKING ADMIT IT ALREADY! YOU ENJOY KILLNG ANIMALS!! Bye BYE!

[Redneck Socialist]

305. I don't admit it because it's not accurate...

...at least not in the way you are attempting to frame the conversation.

I enjoy hunting, very much so, but hunting does not equal killing animals.

Would you accept a right winger framing abortion as murder? I suspect not. Someone who supports a woman's right to choose is not likely to agree to the proposition that they support murdering babies, likewise hunters and killing animals.

From time to time I forget that I'm on DU and suffer under the delusion that people actually want to talk about things rather than simply score snark points. Alas it's not long before that delusion is wiped away.

[Codeine]

221. I'll join you in that sentiment.

And I don't even eat the shit. Haven't for almost two decades.

Unless these people are avoiding meat altogether they live on PRECISELY the same moral plane as hunters, only with a protective layer of hypocrisy wrapped 'round them like a warm coat of blubber.

[DutchLiberal]

113. False dilemma.

[Skittles]

116. they never admit they love killing animals

it's all a NOBLE thing to do dontcha know Dutchliberal - they're HUMANE and SAVING THEM FROM STARVING!!!

[Odin2005]

114. You are an anti-rural bigot. Period. n/t.

[carguy67]

121. anti rural?

Really how? I am rural... color me confused.

You guys still can't accept that either way an animal dies. Either I pay someone to kill and clean it or do it myself. Difference is? None animal still dies.

If you hire someone to kill a person is it anyless murder than doing it yourself?

[DutchLiberal]

126. Boo fucking hoo. I don't even know what that's supposed to mean --lol!

I repeat: hunting for 'sport' IS evil. Period.

[carguy67]

137. In your

Opinion, your opinion which you are entitled to as an American. If you think it is ok for someone to kill it for you instead of yourself then believe that.

If you think cleaning a stinky dead animal is fun then believe it.

Could you at least try to answer my questions I asked earlier?

Why should I pay someone to do something I can do?

How is it different than a farmer raising a steer to kill and feed his family It's not. When we kill our steer this fall it'll be the same as if I shoot a deer. Both get a bullet to the head and both feed my family.

[DutchLiberal]

145. Explaining for the third time now why this 'argument' doesn't ring true:

Look, I'm a vegetarian, okay, but your 'reasoning' doesn't make any sense. There's a BIG difference between killing animals for FOOD and for FUN ('sport'), okay? The first has an objective, the latter has NONE.

And I'm not an American. :)

[carguy67]

149. Ok

So you are Dutch as in... Gotcha.

Again I live on a farm, either way an animal dies. Only Difference is if it's a cow, chicken, pig, or deer.

I understand that you do not eat meat.

What you are saying is that I can not kill the deer but I can kill the other animals because one is "fun". They are food, not fun.

No disrespect but as you are not in this country and your views have no bearing on votes or decision making I will not be responding to anymore of your posts on this thread.

[DutchLiberal]

160. That is the single most stupid thing I have ever heard.

"No disrespect but as you are not in this country and your views have no bearing on votes or decision making I will not be responding to anymore of your posts on this thread."

Isn't this just another way of saying: I have run out of arguments?

[carguy67]

181. No

I could go on all day but what does it matter? You do not have any bearing on this country and you keep using the same argument. I respect your views thought I disagree, they are yours to have. I'm just done talking about it with you. No need to be rude, I have not at any point been disrespectful to you though you hve been to me and others here.

If you want to go further then send me a PM or Email and stop cluttering this threat with this petty BS.

[I Have A Dream]

243. Umm...

"No disrespect but as you are not in this country and your views have no bearing on votes or decision making I will not be responding to anymore of your posts on this thread."

:wtf:

I've never seen anything so outrageously ridiculous! :rofl:

How utterly provincial... :eyes:

[dlovato]

127. Re:Hunting for 'sport' IS evil. Period

I suppose that if you have a slaughter house kill an animal you never even saw alive, so long as it's nicely wrapped is OK.

Great...

I'm coming to think that Humanity is doomed. We're WAY too removed from nature - in all it's beauty, and "ugly-ness".

- Darryl

[DutchLiberal]

134. I repeat: false argument.

Look, I'm a vegetarian, okay, but your 'reasoning' doesn't make any sense. There's a BIG difference between killing animals for FOOD and for FUN ('sport'), okay? The first has an objective, the latter has NONE.

[Fumesucker]

147. There is a difference between killing in order to eat meat and killing because you enjoy killing..

I know several hunters, most of them fall into the "killing to eat" variety, but I can think of one that I'm quite sure kills because he enjoys killing. Unsurprisingly he is also one of the most far out fundie nutjobs I've ever met, and I live in the buckle of the Bible Belt where fundie nutjobs are a dime a gross in hundred gross lots.

It is the latter group that many, if not all, of the people you are calling nutjobs are complaining about.

Like I said in my earlier post, now that predator species are all but gone hunting is a necessity in order to keep the prey species under control and ensure that their populations do not "boom and bust" with millions of animals starving to death and the land stripped bare of food.

Edited to add: It's quite clear that Ctheney enjoys killing, those canned quail hunts are disgusting.

[Codeine]

115. Your meat is bad and evil.

Their meat is good and healthy and pure and moral.

Of course, the animals YOU shoot lead normal, comfortable lives before you kill them, while the animals THEY eat lead squalid, miserable, horrid, filthy, painful, empty existences that would sicken anyone with a soul before they eat them.

But you're the bad guy, I guess.

Don't get me wrong, I can't stand killing animals for food and don't participate in that activity, but I fail to see any significant moral difference between a deer shot in the snowy forest and a cow killed in a filthy slaughterhouse, other than the fact that the deer was undoubtedly happier during it's time on Earth.

[Ex Lurker]

129. a number of people here seem to be

either out of touch with reality, or are trolls trying to make DU look like a collection of nutjobs. JMHO. Although I don't believe for a minute that they're representative, they do make a lot of noise and draw attention out of proportion to their numbers, and it's just one more hurdle to overcome in trying to reach mainstream voters who would ordinarily be receptive to a variety of democratic issues. They may not like the GOP because of the economy or the war, but they're utterly repelled by idiocy like this.

[Odin2005]

229. DU is not representative of the American Left, not even close.

My relatives, proud Dems all of them, would laugh at the culture war BS and conspiracy nonsense and it so disconnected from the needs of lower-income Americans it is pathetic. This is why we loose elections, the culture warriors care more about their pet issues then the problems of the average American. There are a lot more threads about cultural issues and BS conspiracy theories then there are about poverty, which says a lot about DU.

[Stern21]

143. I used to hunt.

And then I changed my mind as I matured.

I saw no need for my being personally responsible for the death of another entity when I didn't need to be. I saw the folly of killing as sport.

How many of the wolves that Palin put a bounty on fed people?

[KoKo]

148. I guess I wonder what's left to HUNT that gives "Sportmen" a thrill...most are on Endangered List...

Unless you are into "culling deer" and most of that has been taken care of by states doing "sterilization programs." So, you are killing "neutered deer?" Maybe you hope to bag an "errant bear" or "bobcat" that's been reintroduced into the environment? Or...is it just he THRILL OF THE STALKING AND THE KILL?

Maybe you like them "penned up" for more of a challenge? :shrug:

[carguy67]

151. KoKo

Hunters & fisherman put more time & money into wildlife preservation than PETA or like groups. Disagree? Do some research. If that industry goes away then why to businessmen who own much of the land do animals need to live there? They will find something else to do with it and the animals are SOL. Love it or hate it, it is what it is.

Belittling someone because you disagree is not the best way to earn respect and get a point across.

[KoKo]

185. Yes...but they are the GOOD GUYS/GALS...can you find where Palin supports these groups?

:shrug:

[dlovato]

156. KoKo01 is a good handle for you...

You are Ko koo...

>Unless you are into "culling deer" and most of that has been taken care of by states doing "sterilization programs."

Please tell me the states that have sterilized all their deer - or even a majority - actually any of their deer.

> So, you are killing "neutered deer?"

See above. No wild deer are neutered.

> Maybe you hope to bag an "errant bear" or "bobcat" that's been reintroduced into the environment?

There are VERY few bear that have been "re-introduced" - 99+% of all bear (even higher for bobcat populations) are non-introduced or re-introduced in the area they live.

> Or...is it just he THRILL OF THE STALKING AND THE KILL?

Part of it is the stalking - the killing part is sort of a non-event. Most hunters I know don't "enjoy" the "act" of pulling the trigger, but it is a necessary part of the whole hunting process.

>Maybe you like them "penned up" for more of a challenge?

Naw... I'd rather have them funneled into a chute at a slaughter house where they can't move at all and killed that way - I think they'd have more of a chance.

What a nut.

- Darryl

[KoKo]

188. HA! Your post speaks more about what "You" are about than my DU handle that you know nothing about!

:rofl: You aren't aware of the "Active Neutering Program" in America's finest resorts on the East Coast where the Deer are a problem but some wealthy activist property owners" don't want them shot...so the wealthy support programs for "deer sterilization?" Do you know in all the wealthy Resort Communities all around America where mosquitoes are a problem...they do an "abatement program" in the creeks, ponds, lakes and rivers so that the tourists and residents aren't subjected to West Nile? or annoying "bites?"

You need to get better informed before you start slinging mud...and trashing DU'ers User Names that you want to make fun of.. :D Shows some lake of insight...it would seem. I don't want to say..."stuck in your hunter hidy hole with blinders"...because then I would see like you.

[seabeyond]

159. i hate hunting. hate looking at kill. and hate eating it. and totally embrace my son and hubby

going out hunting and doing their thing. there is a lot of good in hunting. just not my thing. i am clever enough to figure it out and not ALL have to be just like me. so yawl do your things and i will do mine not picking up a gun

[janx]

165. I don't hunt (having never been that hungry), but I love to fish!

Is that terrible?

[carguy67]

171. Not at all

But I am certain that many of the hunting is evil killing innocent animals people would say it is. If not then they are being hypocritical as a fish is every bit as living.

[janx]

193. My bottom line is this (no fishing pun intended!):

If you eat what you hunt, no problem. If you hunt just for the fun of it--that's immoral. Many people who eat fast food (which I do not) are squeamish about hunting, but they're not at all squeamish about the crap they eat.

And it's crap, all right, especially McDonald's. Within a McDonald's hamburger is everything but the Moo.

Anyway, this was all brought up because of Alaska, and I've been to Alaska and know what the culture is like.

[carguy67]

212. Fun

I don't have a problem with people hunting for fun if they eat what they kill.

The vegans here will disagree because killing animals is wrong. They can feel that as long as they do not belittle those who disagree. If someone is eating meat and saying hunting is evil they are the worst type of anti hunter.

[dlovato]

173. Far left "crazier" than Far right?

I'm starting to think the far left is crazier than the far right. AND - I think I know the reason it appears that way.

The far left don't use their brains at all - they only use their "heart". And thus have trouble seeing or making "reasoned" arguments.

I posted a message with the economic benefits of hunting (and how McCain's pick was actually pretty smart), and looked at the replies - I've posted why hunting is just doing what most people do when they buy meat at the store (just not paying someone to do it for you) Most of the responses (or lack of reasoned ones) that I expected from both of these was very surprising.

- Darryl

[carguy67]

187. But

I don't care what makes sense, I just care about what makes me feel good.

Anyone who does not agree is wrong and stupid & in denial.

[janx]

198. I agree with you about some things, but I don't agree that McCain's

pick was smart. I have family and friends in Alaska.

[dlovato]

211. Re: I agree with you about some things, but I don't agree that McCain's

Given what McCain had to work with - I think it was smart...

* Obama passed up what I think was a golden opportunity. If he would have chosen Hillary, I don't think McCain would have had a chance in the overall election.
- Obama would have IMHO locked it up.
- Obama passed, and I think I understand why - could you imagine being Obama and constantly being second guessed and overshadowed by not just Hillary, but Bill?
- He could have found another woman, but needed someone who would help bolster his lack of international experience - hence Biden

* But, because Obama passed on Hillary, he left the door open for McCain to get a woman.
- McCain needed a "younger VP" - he got that
- McCain needed to solidify the far right base (anti-abortion/NRA/Christian Fundamentalists etc) - He got that
- McCain needed help in the "toss up" states - he got that
- McCain needed to get someone who was known as an "outsider" to bolster his "Maverick persona" - He got that
- McCain needed someone who had "executive" experience (vs legislative experience) - she's probably more "prepared" to be president based on experience as Governor than McCain/Obama and Biden.

Thus, brilliant move on McCain's part - not sure if it will work in the end, but I can see his reasoning...

Obama's biggest issue now is he's busy attacking Bush/Cheney (who isn't running for president), Palin - who's the VP, and the war (which is doing well now)....

i.e. Obama's attacking the decoys, and not the "duck" he's running against. That will be Obama's downfall if he continues.

- Darryl

[janx]

220. Obama is not a creature of DC.

He's a believer in a 50-state strategy, which ultimately came from Howard Dean. There's no way he would choose another Clinton for his VP.

More power to him!

McCain chose Palin, unwisely, because of her perceived religion. It's terribly manipulative. He's desperately trying to hold on to the base that surfaced with Reagan--who, by the way, was an old Dem and dragged some old religious Dems from the South to win the presidency.

The wonderful thing about Obama is that he is tired of such divisions. He doesn't see religion as being a factor and still believes that all of us can agree on ways to deal with problems. He is a magnificent human being.

I love Alaska and plan to return soon to see my family and friends, but I have to tell you, they're scratching their heads at the Palin choice!

[Regret My New Name]

205. lol, 'far-anything' is crazy...In my opinion. Although, the far-centers piss me off the most.

[Odin2005]

230. "Far-anything is crazy" DITTO!

I know that very well, I was a Marxist-Leninist nut in high school. I still consider myself a socialist, but I am a very different socialist then the Marxists and Anarcho-Socialists.

[AtomicKitten]

191. Considering we are devastating their natural habitat, hunting is a soulless endeavor.

Sorry if that offends your strident insistence on your right to kill.

[Stump]

206. Proud hunter here...this is why.

In the county where I live, the police work at least one deer vs. vehicle accident a day...most days & nights more than one, especially during mating season. When I hunt I keep meat for my family to eat during the year and donate the rest to Hunters For The Hungry which helps feed my state's poor.

So the way I see it, the deer can die of disease or get struck by vehicles and die or worse, limp back into the woods for an agonizing death that may take days and the buzzards eat the meat...or I can kill them in a much more humanely way and help feed hungry people. I sleep good at night. Natural selection is what it is.

[SteppingStone]

218. Please...

That's what she says too. And they are avid snow mobile racers too. Everything REAL environmentalists in the area are fighting against!!!

Okay, go kill a wolf to protect the environment! (Your apartment?) :puke:

[Codeine]

224. Most hunters don't kill predatory animals.

They kill prey animals; deer, antelope, elk, etc.

[SteppingStone]

233. I grew up in West Yellowstone -

small town on the border of Yellowstone National Park. We get lots of tourists that come into town looking to find an area outside of the park to get an easy trophy kill. Fuck THEM!!! Some of the locals hunt for meat. I don't have a problem with them. The tourists that come into town mainly hunt for the thrill of it! They want to bag something to put on their wall. They make my skin crawl.

:grr:

[SammyWinstonJack]

226. I don't understand killing animals.

:shrug: Whatever trips your trigger, I guess. For the record I eat cereal and pasta and vegetables and fruit.

[Codeine]

236. Completely off topic,

that is a remarkably beautiful dog. :hi:

[MiniMe]

227. I don't object to hunting, as long as the deer or whatever is used

I don't like killing just to kill. If she hunts caribou and the meat goes to her family or to feed the homeless, I'm fine with it.

I also object to hunting from helicopters with a gun. I don't know if that has to do with Palin or not, as far as the shooting goes, but she is for shooting polar bears and wolves from helicopters.

[Odin2005]

232. Hunting from copters is just vile.

Hunting large carnivores from copters is even more vile. Hunting is supposed to be about getting back to nature.

My stepdad prepares the meat from the game we kill himself, and has a nice little machine he uses to make home-made Slim-Jims out of the meat. 100% organic that stuff!!!

[Lisa0825]

231. I can't object to hunting on principle because I eat meat.

But I admit I have a very hard time understanding how someone can kill an animal. Still, I see my own hypocrisy in that. For my own part, I have begun buying meat that is raised free range with no hormones, and is local and killed humanely. I still can't comprehend the mind of the person who does the killing, but they do it for me, so I can't hold it against them.

I do have a serious problem with people who display pelts, heads, and bodies like trophies, and those who hunt for fun, not for food. They disgust me.

[Vattel]

234. Wildlife management 101

To reduce populations, kill the females. Apparently deer hunters didn't take the class.

[dlovato]

237. RE:Wildlife management 101

The problem with "doe hunts" is that "citizens" get involved (non hunters) and force Fish and Game Departments to not have doe hunts available - California is a good example. The fish & game department tries to have doe hunts to keep the does from starving, but the counties have "veto" authority over those hunts. Another case of ill-informed, but well meaning people trying to "do right" in their mind - in this case - don't shoot the "girls" - but in the process cause the starvation of many many hundreds of deer.

[carguy67]

258. Wrong

Most hunters would rather shoot a doe to manage population. Many of the state regulations only allow a small window to hunt does while giving all season to kill bucks. I would rather eat a doe anyways, they taste better as they are not stressed out from fighting for a mate all season. That and Antlers don't taste all that good.

[MasonJar]

235. It blows my mind that people can hunt other live creatures for the pleasure of killing them.

I'm sorry, but that is how I feel. I, however, recognize that some do not feel this way, but to kill animals with highpowered rifles from airplanes and other despicable methods that give the animal no shot at escape is beyond humanity; it is not the way animals act. Only man is so arrogant and cruel as to kill for no reason except enjoyment.

[Regret My New Name]

270. I think most would agree with you when it comes to people shooting animals from helicopters.

I believe the op was talking about those who criticize all hunting, even those who do it for food. I don't hunt, and I doubt I ever would, but I've seen some pretty convincing arguments about why some people do hunt. People who live in very rural areas do it for food, not necessarily for sport. I see little difference in that and other methods of getting food. If anything, I think that it's far better for the animals than if they were stuck on some factory farm their whole lives.

I just don't understand what some people want when it comes to this...

[NeedleCast]

239. Best to Just Ignore Them

You won't convince the zealots. They are no different from the religion nutters on the right in their attempts to enforce their morality on others.

[Vattel]

244. Actually

I've learned a lot from the discussion above. At least anti-hunters like leftymom give interesting arguments in defense of their positions. I like it when people try to convince me of their moral positions. Sometimes they even succeed.

[NeedleCast]

252. Nothing I haven't Seen from The Zealots Before

I think you're missing my point.

I have no problem with vegetarians or vegans. They've made a choice. Cool. I am even happy to discuss the merits of such a lifestyle and have done so with my vegetarian friends in the past.

What I do have a problem with is people who have made such a choice attempting to act as if it makes them morally superior and condemning those who refuse to do as they do as evil or amoral. Whether it's vegetarians or the Anti-SUV brigade or religious nutters or people who get all pissy because someone else refuses to boycott shopping at Wal-Mart. All the same to me. It barks of authoritarianism.

If people want to discuss the merits of driving a Prius over an Escalade, that's cool with me. If someone wants to talk to me about a religion that differs from mine, that's fine too, and a conversation I'd like to have, as theology in general interests me. However, if that person has taken the stance that I am immoral or evil because I've made a choice that differs from those they have made, then that person has a lot to learn about being a progressive, because that's what zealots do. When you bow down to zealotry, you bow down to authoritarianism.

[HughMoran]

247. Agreed

I don't hunt, but I don't care about the people that do - they don't bother me, though I am not fond of the meat.

[mbee]

248. I might just be that some people's idea of hunting is

captive hunting and other unfair practices. Sounds like she subscribes to this type of activity. The animal should have a real change in a fair hunt in my view.

[progressivebydesign]

263. Forgive me if I don't find killing things enjoyable...

Not everyone has to agree with what you enjoy or do for fun. And we have a right to our opinions. And I'm not a fan of anyone that thinks it enjoyable to take the life of another living being. (I relocate spiders I find in my house, and just don't kill things -- and yes, I'm a vegetarian.)

The point that Caribou Barbie is driving force for "hunting" wolves from the sky... terrorizing them by chasing them from the sky until they fall from exhaustion and then shooting them to death. Oh, and don't forget that you have to CUT OFF THEIR LEG to get your $150.00 bux from Gov. Caribout Barbie.

[Regret My New Name]

266. us meat eaters eat the spiders we find... It would be wrong to let our murders go to waste.

On a slightly more serious note... ok, not really that serious, but whatevs. If you found a black widow or some other poisonous spider, would you try to relocate that too?

[progressivebydesign]

269. LOL - It's kill or be killed with black widows!!

Okay, those I farm out to someone else to kill! I hate them!!

[Regret My New Name]

264. It's 2004, there is no need to kill animals anymore...

If we all got our meat from supermarkets then no animals would have to be harmed...

This is a fact that I just made up in order to be factual.


I dunno... I'm in a extra stupid mood today for some reason. I think it's those cupcakes I ate.

[rabbits4love]

281. Im gettin annoyed at 'huntin helps the animals!' people

so whats your point ?

you know, i never really thought much about hunting until i started helping wild animals that were injured or sick.

once you realise a Deer can see you as a friend and actually come towards you to get a rub or a pet on the head...
or that you can get a rabbit to be house broken, learn tricks, and follow you around like a little puppy...

you realise these creatures are very much capable of thought, very much alive, and very much able to be a friend as much as a dog or cat can be...
THEN you realise killing defenseless animals that mean you no harm is wrong.

its one thing if your life is endangered or endangering other animals/peoples lifes...
but killing something for the thrill of the hunt ... well.. its just messed up... and while it doesnt mean your a psychopath or a cold blooded killer... it does mean that youre able to detatch yourself from the world of living and not living just long enough to get off on it.

i dont have a problem with people owning guns, so save that line for someone else...

i just think killing things when they are capable of atleast semi-rational thought, understanding, and ability to learn things is ... well... sick.

but hey, if you can kill things regardless of how they are effecting you... more power to ya.
as for me, count me out.

[TexasObserver]

282. Hunting is fine, when done appropriately.

I do not favor trophy taking of any kind. I do not favor any hunting of any species whose survival is threatened. Most hunting, sadly, is not about the skill of hunting, killing, and butchering game, but of trophy taking and bragging about killing Bambi with an RPG.

I have not hunted in over two decades, because hunting has become increasingly boorish and divorced from its historical purpose and rationale. If you don't eat the meat, you're not really a hunter.

[cottonseed]

287. The most evil? Accusatory consumers of Tofu.

Soybeans, just like many other large crop commodities such as rice, beans, and corn are industrially farmed crops. Many mice, raccoons, muskrats, owls, and a variety of birds are sucked into the combines during harvest. It happens. If you eat and poo, then you're probably responsible for some poor animal's death. Sorry.

[Pithlet]

288. You know, it's understandable though.

I grew up around hunting. I grew up in Michigan. My dad hunts. My grandpa hunted. If you didn't hunt, you knew someone who did. I never went, myself, because I had no interest. But I can fully understand how people who've never been acclimated to that culture would be utterly appalled by it. It's bloody and gruesome. I don't get why hunters are so surprised and offended that there are those who are put off by it. It's killing. And Palin is ridiculously over the top about it.

[madeline_con]

291. Fish bait an ammo are not equal. n/t

[Vektor]

298. I accept hunting...

...though I choose not to do it myself. I am not moved to hunt, but if a person chooses to with proper permits, and is not poaching, then I respect and accept that as their choice. Like the Swiffer commercial says "I hunt mostly small game - dust mites and allergens." :-)

I do not support killing animals for sport, just to kill, though. If you do not plan to use what you catch as a food source, and just want heads/trophies to hang in your office, or pelts to throw on your floor, but have no desire to feed your family with what you kill, or you cannot respect the environment and the circle of life the way Native Americans did when they hunted, then I am opposed. Any resource, including animals killed for food, should be utilized with proper respect for the grand scheme.

There is a difference between hunting for food, and killing for fun with no regard for the environment or the preservation of the animal population, or respect for the life you are taking to feed you and yours.

A man shooting an elk because he and his family can like off of the steaks for weeks is a HELL of a lot different than Sarah Palin and her ilk hanging out of a helicopter slaughtering wolves just out of plain cruelty. Sacrificing the lives of bears in order to drill for more oil is sick, selfish, and greedy. That's not "hunting", that's psychosis.

I trust you know exactly where I am coming from and understand the difference. You probably dislike poachers and environmental rapists as much as I do.

[krabigirl]

303. Sorry, hunting as a sport sickens me, unless it's to eat the meat or use the hide somehow.

Not as a trophy.